Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Democrats escalated attacks on U.S. Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito, accusing him of evasion and inconsistency in fielding questions on abortion and his membership in a group that opposed admitting women to his alma mater, Princeton University.

Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat, told Alito his testimony ``left in question the future'' of the high court's 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide.

Partisan rancor erupted as Democrats also continued to hammer at a 1985 application Alito submitted for a political job in the Reagan administration that touted his membership in Concerned Alumni of Princeton. The group opposed the admission of women and what it regarded as unqualified minority students.

Alito's explanations for his membership in ``this, sort of, radical group, and why you listed it on your job application are extremely troubling,'' said Massachusetts Democrat Edward M. Kennedy. ``I don't think they add up.''

At one point, Alito's wife left the hearing in tears as her husband was being questioned about his membership in the group.

The bickering intensified on the third day of Alito's confirmation hearings when Kennedy sought a Judiciary Committee vote to subpoena records of the Princeton group that might contradict Alito's statement he wasn't an active member.

Specter in Charge

``I will not have you run this committee and decide that we will go into executive session,'' said Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, as his voice rose in anger. Later, Specter said no subpoena was necessary because the records would be made available to the committee.

Kennedy repeatedly questioned Alito about whether he endorsed the views expressed in the group's magazine Prospect. In a 1993 article entitled ``In Defense of Elitism,'' the magazine said: ``People nowadays, just don't know their place. Blacks and Hispanics are demanding their jobs simply because they are black and Hispanic.''

Alito disavowed the views expressed in the piece and other articles.

``I disagree with all of that,'' Alito replied. ``If I thought that's what this organization stood for, I never would have associated myself with it.''

Alito, a 1972 Princeton graduate, says he can't recall joining the group and that he may have supported it because it opposed the expulsion of military training on campus during the Vietnam War. He said he wasn't aware until recent weeks that two prominent alumni, former Senator Bill Bradley, a New Jersey Democrat, and Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist, had denounced the group.

Tearful Exit

``If I had been involved actively in any way in the group, I'm sure that I would remember that,'' Alito testified.

Alito's wife, Martha, began to cry and left the hearing room as the issue came up again. She wiped a tear from one eye when South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, a supporter of the nomination, was trying to debunk suggestions that her husband shared the group's view.

``Are you really a closet bigot?'' Graham said.

``I am not any kind of bigot, I'm not,'' Alito replied. ``No sir, you're not,'' Graham said. ``You seem to be a decent, honorable man.''

``Graham's statement brought out some long-held emotions about how he was being characterized,'' said former Indiana Senator Dan Coats, who was assisting the Bush administration on Alito's nomination.

Recall of Court Cases

``Her emotions just caught up with her after 2 1/2 days of hearing her husband's record mischaracterized,'' Coats said. Alito's wife returned to the hearing room after the committee's late afternoon break.

Kennedy told reporters that Alito's failure of memory about the Princeton group was ``extraordinary'' in light of his extensive recall of court cases in which he participated. He demanded that Alito's supporters stop trying to ``hide'' the Library of Congress records on the group.

The material is among the papers of William Rusher, former publisher of the National Review magazine and a 1943 Princeton graduate. Specter said that Rusher agreed to give committee investigators access to the material. Republicans distributed a New York Times article published in November that said the records provided no indication Alito was an active member in the group.

1985 Memo

Durbin, meantime, pressed Alito to explain why he wouldn't say whether he still believed, as he wrote in a 1985 memo, that the Constitution doesn't protect a woman's right to an abortion.

Alito's nomination by President George W. Bush to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a pivotal vote to uphold abortion rights, has drawn opposition from abortion-rights groups such as NARAL Pro-Choice America. Alito, 55, has been a federal appeals court judge since 1990.

``I am concerned that many people will leave this hearing with a question of whether you could be the deciding vote to eliminate the legality of abortion,'' Durbin told Alito.

Wisconsin Democrat Herb Kohl told Alito he was concerned that ``what you are saying is that it is possible if a case comes before you that you would take a look at the principles underlying Roe'' and ``see them in a way that would overturn Roe.''

`Blank Check'

Parrying questions about presidential powers during wartime, Alito said, ``I certainly don't think that the president has a blank check in time of war.''

Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, the panel's top Democrat, said in an interview that he didn't anticipate his party would try to block a Senate vote on Alito with a filibuster, a parliamentary tactic that allows unlimited debate.

``I anticipate an up or down vote,'' he said.

Other Democrats, including New York Senator Charles E. Schumer, have said a filibuster is an option.

Alito testified yesterday that the views he expressed on abortion in the 1985 memo were those of ``a line attorney'' in President Ronald Reagan's administration. Today, Alito declined to give his current thinking, saying abortion ``is an issue that is involved in litigation now at all levels.''

Durbin asked Alito if Roe v. Wade was now ``the settled law of the land.''

``If `settled' means that it can't be re-examined, then that's one thing. If `settled' means that it is precedent,'' then Roe ``is entitled to respect,'' Alito said. The justices' reaffirmation of the decision ``strengthens its value'' as a precedent, he said.

To contact the reporters on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net; Robert Schmidt in Washington at rschmidt5@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: January 11, 2006 18:15 EST